Is NSW heading for a brave new world of Internet censorship where, by protecting some, we effectively block access to all?

A public inquiry into NSW's Net censorship bill got underway last week, with some industry groups using the opportunity to point out that the proposed legislation has the potential to create just as many problems as it solves.

The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Amendment Bill 2001 has already been passed by both houses of the NSW Parliament, but has yet to be proclaimed.

One of the areas the inquiry is looking into is whether the provisions of the Bill regarding regulation of online material is both effective and enforceable.

Jan Burnswood, chair of NSW Legislative Council social issues committee, said the Attorney-General had asked for the inquiry to be conducted because concern was expressed about the Bill as it was being passed last year.

The committee conducted a public inquiry last week, and Burnswood said it would be making its recommendations to the Attorney-General sometime in June.

When ZDNet Australia spoke yesterday with Irene Graham, executive director at online civil liberties organisation Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), she said she thought the Bill should be abandoned.

EFA was one of a number of organisations which made submissions to the inquiry last week. Graham said it felt that the legislation would not achieve its objectives of protecting children from unsuitable online material.

-Really it boils down to more education of parents and teachers," Graham said. -The [Net censorship] legislation won't protect the children -- it's up to parents and it's up to teachers."

-We believe it will give parents who don't know much about the Internet a false sense of security." In her submission at the inquiry Graham said that protecting children online could involve parents either using filtering software or supervising what their children were doing.

-Legislation that simply bans matieral on Australian sites is not going to make the slightest difference," Graham said. -It is not that we are saying that children should be able to access unsuitable material. We do not agree with that at all. But the legislation basically is trying to legislate against it raining."

-It is not going to work. What will happen is that it will restrict adults' rights online far more than offline, whilst not actually achieving anything towards protecting children."

-Basically, we would say that you just do not give six-year-olds a computer and just let them use it. I mean, you do not let them go and run around Kings Cross. Why let them roam free on the Internet?"

Peter Coroneos, chief executive at the Internet Industry Association (IIA) said it was interested in seeing a balanced outcome. -Protecting children online, which we support, balanced against some technical realities of the Internet," he said.

Coroneos said that the issue needed to be solved in partnership with industry. -We support efforts to help protect children on the Internet...and to that extent it's an industry issue as much as it's an issue for government."

However, he added that one of the concerns was the unintended consequences of the legislation, and the issue of whether the Bill went further than it sought to.

In the Australian Computer Society's (ACS) submission to the inquiry, its vice president Phillip Argy, also raised concerns about the effect on consenting adults. -There is no exception for being an adult or knowingly supplying it to adults," Argy said. -The Bill simply does not envisage that scenario. You just simply cannot make it available at all...That is literally saying to all Australians of adult age, 'this material is not to be made available in NSW, in case children get to see it'."

Copyright © 2009 CBS Interactive, a CBS Company. All Rights Reserved.
ZDNET is a registered service mark of CBS Interactive. ZDNET Logo is a service mark of CBS Interactive.